Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 8502880" data-attributes="member: 7023840">1. Most legacy products have serious issues. Whether it's the obvious errors of commission (in GAZ10), or the inevitable errors of omission (the absence of representation), they will have the problematic issues because they are products of their time. Trying to determine how much "better" or "worse" a particular product is becomes a fool's errand in many ways, simply because most of the products either reflect or do not reflect particular issues that went mostly unobserved at the time; and, as I noted before in this thread, these issues are particularly apparent with humor.2. Nearly costless does not mean costless. While I don't know what WoTC's deal is with DTRPG, I assume they negotiated something less than the standard 30% sole source. Probably a good deal less. Still, they have operating costs associated with their legacy products, and have to give up a cut of the proceeds. Let's say it's 80% pure profit. That means that, assuming it never goes on sale, every single copy of GAZ10 sold would provide $8 of pure profit. Pretty good so far, huh?3. Okay then, but how many copies do you think they sell of GAZ10? Honestly? I think 10 copies a month is generous, but I'd be happy to be corrected. So let's say it's 50 copies (that's 600 copies a year, which I would be SHOCKED BY). That would make it quite the outlier! And it would provide ... $400 of pure profit per month, and $4800 per year. Which, again ... really generous (IMO).4. Here's the thing, though. The OP was specifically asking for this to apply to all legacy products. All of them. The OP is well within their rights to ask for that! But that's where I will disagree. I think the OP's analysis of GAZ10 was correct, but I also think that these are historical (legacy) products, and as such a disclaimer is sufficient. Otherwise, this quickly ends up being not cost effective, given that there are so many legacy products, and so many issues. I have a rational (and well-founded) belief that most corporations don't want to deal with products that cause a lot of controversy, and little profit (or even a loss).5. Then there's the issue of the charitable selection. The OP concentrated on the slurs toward American Indians and suggested (IIRC) a Lakota charity. Great! But they weren't the only ones that were insulted, were they? There are insults towards Asians, towards women, towards black Americans... there's a lot that didn't age well. So this, too, becomes yet another issue of covering the corporate behind- when everyone gets insulted, you just end up with a charitable donation to some pabulum charity, like the United Way (ugh). And again, we have to direct this toward the appropriate charities for all groups.6. Now, here's the rub. Maybe you think that this specific product is so offensive it has to be dealt with- obviously, the peanuts generated by it don't really matter, and it's almost tokenism at that point, right? But there's so many products, from the ones that people keep calling attention to (GAZ10, Oriental Adventures and its progeny, Ravenloft, etc. etc. etc) to all the issues in all the books (like the casual misogyny that I mentioned above). Any review would find these issues. Recurring, Over and over again.So in the end, what do you think a rational company would do? Enter into an endless cycle of publicly apologizing and making amends and paying money to charities (and getting into controversy if they don't select the right charities) for products that don't even make them much money, or just pulling the whole thing?WOTC isn't a charity, or an educational institution. It is a subsidiary of Hasbro, which is a corporation- and corporations exists to make money- not to spend it on educating us about the ills of the past. If we keep the outrage meter dialed up on legacy products that aren't really part of their profit plan, we will go back to the situation we had not too long ago when they aren't available. I'd rather not see that happen. That is separate and apart from continuing to press them on making their current products more inclusive, which we should continue to do.(And as an aside, the sad and unfortunate truth is that while the overall market for 5e and D&D is much younger and more inclusive ... which is great .... it is also likely the case that continued rancor over these issues will cause an impact in the sales to the specific sub-market that is most interested in legacy products. Which sucks, because #notallgrognards, but it's also somewhat true.)The past is foreign country- they do things differently there.Look- if this is all that mattered, life would be pretty simple, right? All we have to do is ... tell people not to be baddies! Problem is all solved.Let me ask you a question- did you ever have to take a required traffic education course because of a ticket or something? How did that make you feel? Did you take it seriously?The people that understand the issues will seek the information out. The people that don't care will ignore it anyway. This does no good at all (IMO). You want to make things better? Make them better today. Don't call on Hasbro to make an educational program. You donate some money to the Lakota school (or other worthy charity). The best way to make things better is to do things to make it better- not to agitate for others to do it for you.The OP was unfortunately thread banned, but I am sure they would acknowledge the many problems that American Indians face today and would support efforts to do things RIGHT NOW that make a difference. How about instead of worrying too much about the racism in book from more than three decades ago that almost no one remembers, people instead do something about a baseball team that just won the world series that uses a tomahawk chop and racist chant? Just saying... we can solve many problems, but maybe some are a little more on-point to today?Arguing for measures in a low-margin industry that will greatly increase the cost of the product will have the same effect as a ban, given that the for-profit company will simply make it unavailable. After all, it's cheaper to simply not provide it than to go through this.</blockquote>

Verification